Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, September 15, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#11 #03-2944 JONATHON MENTH, Continued) <br /> Menth stated that his parents bought the home in 1991 and that he believed the original <br /> deck, as built in 1967 was 6'X26', however had been enlarged over the years. He <br /> acknowledged that the deck he removed was in poor condition, rotting, and unsafe,while <br /> the patio below was a poured slab and footings in fine shape. He stated that it would be his <br /> desire to replace the deck he tore off and keep the lower patio as is, since he was unsure <br /> whether removal of the footings around the edge of the patio might jeopardize the integrity <br /> of the whole slab. <br /> Zugschwert inquired what size the deck was that the applicant tore off. <br /> Menth stated that it was probably closer to 8'X26' than his proposed 10'X26'. At the time <br /> he removed the deck, Menth pointed out that he also had removed railway ties in the 0-75' <br /> setback zone in an effort to reduce hardcover and clean up the shoreline. <br /> Rahn stated that he was confused by the size of the lower patio, as well as, the upper deck. <br /> Menth stated that the lower patio was surrounded by a pea gravel type rock which made <br /> the edge somewhat undefined. <br /> Rahn questioned whether the deck and patio should be reduced to the original 8'X26'. <br /> Bremer empathized with the applicants concern that if the slab patio was cut back and the <br /> footings removed, it might jeopardize the integrity of the whole patio. <br /> Upon doing some soil correction himself, Menth made note that the perimeter of the patio <br /> slab seemed to have a foundation of sorts under it. <br /> Hawn too, believed the patio should be cut back unless it compromised the integrity of the <br /> slab and questioned how they would determine this. <br /> Bremer stated that she could support the proposed 10'X26' deck. <br /> Hawn asked where the 10'X26' proposal came from. <br /> Mabusth pointed out that the proposed 10'X26' deck does not cause any encroachment <br /> problems, or increase hardcover; however, there is already excessive hardcover. <br /> Gaffron suggested they cut off the slab, if the integrity of the slab is in tact, to equal the <br /> amount or size of the above deck. <br /> Hawn suggested they table the application to answer the integrity question. <br /> PAGE 20 of 25 <br />